Vadas József (szerk.): Ars Decorativa 13. (Budapest, 1993)

DÉTSHY Mihály: Sárospatak várának "aranyos kárpitjai"

well, for example the ones in the Gyulafehérvár Castle that had already been purchased by Gábor Bethlen.

10 The identification of the tapestries mentioned in the inventories is slighty impeded by the fact that Mednyánszky 's letter only revealed the total size and that of the single pieces, whereas the inventories provide us with the number 36 and these two can hardly be compared. According to the letter the total breadth of the tapestries was 41 Viennese ells, i.e. about 31 meters and the single pieces were 4, 7 and 9 ells, i.e. 3,10, 5.42 and 6.98 meters long. Thus the biggest amount of pieces contain one 7, one 9 and six 4-ell pieces, that is, altogether 8. The 36 pieces mentioned in the inventories could exist only if we suppose that - just like in the inventories of the Gyulafehérvár tapestries - separate "borders", draperies completed the tapestries to cover the whole surface. This would explain why Mednyánszky asked for a detailed measuring of the room according to Viennese ells, in order to decide whether the tapestries offered would be sufficient. Since these tapestries were not made to measure, for that he wrote: "it is impossible to find pieces that exactly match the disposition of the Patak Palace." The total side length of the rooms with the widths of a window, two doors, a compartment and a stove deducted would make about 20 meters, so it is possible lhat the 41-cll-long (30 meters long) tapestries were arranged in two rows above each other. The seven and nine-ell-long pieces could only be hung on the two sides, above the doors. The gaps between the tapestries were most likely filled with the "borders". Unfortunately it is not mentioned either in Mednyánszky

's letter or in the inventories what the tapestries represented. The only thing we know from Mednyánszky is that "they are decorated with fine figures and stories". As far as the material is concerned he only mentioned that it is "with silk abundant in them" but he did not indicate their colour. The list, on the other hand, refers to them as "golden wallhangings" which means that they were woven with gold thread, whereas the inventory calls them blue; however, it docs not seem to be a contradiction. About the birthplace of the tapestries we only know that "the Enemy totally ravaged that place the other day" and that is why it was impossible to order new ones or complete the older. In Hungary, just like in Transylvania or in Austria tapestries from Flanders were popular.

11 So we may suppose that these tapestries also came from Flanders. Flanders at that time was ruled by the Hapsburgs and the French constantly tried to gain it back in war in course of which several towns, famous for tapestry-weaving, were sacrificed. Unfortunately we cannot find any other letters in the archives of the Rákóczi family that would prove whether these tapestries had been purchased and decorated the "dining palace". However, we also have no data where the tapestries and other furniture of the dining room were taken after 1701, inspite of the fact that according inventories from 1711 and onwards this room was not damaged during the Rákóczi freedom fight, but was left empty. It is also worth mentioning that Zsuzsanna Lorántffy, as a widow, ordered to look for tapestries in Vienna even in 1651. She wrote on February 20 from her castle in Fogaras in Transylvania: "If Mednyánszky could not find any tapestries, he should leave the money there ... We have also sent some carpets that had veen bought". With these textiles she certainly wanted to decorate the Sárospatak Castle for the wedding of her younger son, Prince Zsigmond in 1652.